{"title":"技术进口方式、环境规制类型与全要素能效","authors":"Shuangshuang Li, Xin Miao, Enhui Feng, Yiqun Liu, Yanhong Tang","doi":"10.1080/15567249.2022.2141374","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This paper examines the mediating roles of different modes of technology import on the relationship between environmental regulations (ERs) and total factor energy efficiency (TFEE) by using the data of 30 provinces of China from 2008 to 2019. Based on the Porter hypothesis, this work reveals that different modes of technology import can be driven by different environmental regulation types, including command-control environmental regulation (CCER) and market-incentive environmental regulation (MIER), which have different impacts on TFEE. By distinguishing technology imports into the purchases of foreign technology (POFT) and the imitations of foreign technology (IOFT), the results show that CCER and MIER induce corporate executives to focus on POFT, resulting in sluggishness in self-innovation and accordingly undermining TFEE. The MIER shifts corporate executives’ attention on IOFT, inspiring them to focus on re-innovation, and is beneficial for improving TFEE. Additionally, this research finds that technology absorption capacity (TAC) can blunt the negative relationship between POFT and TFEE, as well as strengthen IOFT’s positive effect on TFEE. This research unearths the roles of different technology import modes and environmental regulation modes on TFEE. It also uncovers the role of TAC as a moderator for improving TFEE within the context of technology import. It offers a new dialogue perspective about the effects of environmental regulation types on green development, and contributes to the porter hypothesis literature by incorporating the missing technology import factors into the theory, and also provides managerial and policy implications.","PeriodicalId":51247,"journal":{"name":"Energy Sources Part B-Economics Planning and Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Technology import modes, environmental regulation types and total factor energy efficiency\",\"authors\":\"Shuangshuang Li, Xin Miao, Enhui Feng, Yiqun Liu, Yanhong Tang\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/15567249.2022.2141374\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT This paper examines the mediating roles of different modes of technology import on the relationship between environmental regulations (ERs) and total factor energy efficiency (TFEE) by using the data of 30 provinces of China from 2008 to 2019. Based on the Porter hypothesis, this work reveals that different modes of technology import can be driven by different environmental regulation types, including command-control environmental regulation (CCER) and market-incentive environmental regulation (MIER), which have different impacts on TFEE. By distinguishing technology imports into the purchases of foreign technology (POFT) and the imitations of foreign technology (IOFT), the results show that CCER and MIER induce corporate executives to focus on POFT, resulting in sluggishness in self-innovation and accordingly undermining TFEE. The MIER shifts corporate executives’ attention on IOFT, inspiring them to focus on re-innovation, and is beneficial for improving TFEE. Additionally, this research finds that technology absorption capacity (TAC) can blunt the negative relationship between POFT and TFEE, as well as strengthen IOFT’s positive effect on TFEE. This research unearths the roles of different technology import modes and environmental regulation modes on TFEE. It also uncovers the role of TAC as a moderator for improving TFEE within the context of technology import. It offers a new dialogue perspective about the effects of environmental regulation types on green development, and contributes to the porter hypothesis literature by incorporating the missing technology import factors into the theory, and also provides managerial and policy implications.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51247,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Energy Sources Part B-Economics Planning and Policy\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-11-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Energy Sources Part B-Economics Planning and Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/15567249.2022.2141374\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"工程技术\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ENERGY & FUELS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Energy Sources Part B-Economics Planning and Policy","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15567249.2022.2141374","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENERGY & FUELS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Technology import modes, environmental regulation types and total factor energy efficiency
ABSTRACT This paper examines the mediating roles of different modes of technology import on the relationship between environmental regulations (ERs) and total factor energy efficiency (TFEE) by using the data of 30 provinces of China from 2008 to 2019. Based on the Porter hypothesis, this work reveals that different modes of technology import can be driven by different environmental regulation types, including command-control environmental regulation (CCER) and market-incentive environmental regulation (MIER), which have different impacts on TFEE. By distinguishing technology imports into the purchases of foreign technology (POFT) and the imitations of foreign technology (IOFT), the results show that CCER and MIER induce corporate executives to focus on POFT, resulting in sluggishness in self-innovation and accordingly undermining TFEE. The MIER shifts corporate executives’ attention on IOFT, inspiring them to focus on re-innovation, and is beneficial for improving TFEE. Additionally, this research finds that technology absorption capacity (TAC) can blunt the negative relationship between POFT and TFEE, as well as strengthen IOFT’s positive effect on TFEE. This research unearths the roles of different technology import modes and environmental regulation modes on TFEE. It also uncovers the role of TAC as a moderator for improving TFEE within the context of technology import. It offers a new dialogue perspective about the effects of environmental regulation types on green development, and contributes to the porter hypothesis literature by incorporating the missing technology import factors into the theory, and also provides managerial and policy implications.
期刊介绍:
12 issues per year
Abstracted and/or indexed in: Applied Science & Technology Index; API Abstracts/Literature; Automatic Subject Index Citation; BIOSIS Previews; Cabell’s Directory of Publishing Opportunities in Economics and Finance; Chemical Abstracts; CSA Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts; CSA Environmental Sciences & Pollution Management Database; CSA Pollution Abstracts; Current Contents/Engineering, Technology & Applied Sciences; Directory of Industry Data Sources; Economic Abstracts; Electrical and Electronics Abstracts; Energy Information Abstracts; Energy Research Abstracts; Engineering Index Monthly; Environmental Abstracts; Environmental Periodicals Bibliography (EPB); International Abstracts in Operations Research; Operations/Research/Management Science Abstracts; Petroleum Abstracts; Physikalische Berichte; and Science Citation Index.
Taylor & Francis make every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the "Content") contained in our publications. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor & Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to, or arising out of the use of the Content. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions .